Heathen (5th level 4E adventure in Dungeon)

[Xorn]

So I'm curious, since the adventure "Heathen" in Dungeon magazine is a free download, does that mean I can share a module I made this morning for the 4E_JPG ruleset? It's all ready to go, story, maps/images, personalities, items, and tokens. All one module file. :)

[Ged]

Basically no, unfortunately. The fact that it's provided free of charge does not void the copyright.

[mattag08]

where can I download the original module?

[Tenian]

https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/duad/20080613a

[docplutonium]

I wish man!

I've used the Legend of the Silver Skeleton and Hell's Heart by Wizards. And I CAN'T spread the love.

I can understand for the Goodman game modules that you have to buy ( or any material that comes at a fee) that I have used and you are not supposed to release those, but I can't help but to get the feeling that, although they own the material and have the rights to use it as they want, I think the developers would be sad to see people are not using their free products nor are they helping expose them to a wider audience because of some silly copyright thing. Especially for free material that's open to everyone.

I know, I know....sigh...

I am respectful of copyright. But in my head, I can't help to think this is one case where the word of the law has contorted it's meaning.

I wonder...

I know that conversion of modules from one edition to another is legal as long as the copyrighted material is removed. ENWorld has a HUGE library of module conversions. In all of these cases, the artwork (including the maps) was the issue with copyright and left out.

So, with that in mind, and I really don't want to get too deep into it...

Could we put these modules out there with our own artwork and maps ?

Just wondering...

But I agree with you Xorn, shame that after all the work to encode a module, you can't share it with anyone...

Sigh....such a shame
Doc

[Rondor]

It has always been my understanding that copyright is only infringed if you use someone else's intellectual or otherwise property for financial gain or financial gain thru it's promotion. Simply using it doesnt violate any laws.

[Ged]

It has always been my understanding that copyright is only infringed if you use someone else's intellectual or otherwise property for financial gain or financial gain thru it's promotion. Simply using it doesnt violate any laws. That's "pretty much" the essence of a trademark. Copyright is different. (Trademark, too, is a much more complicated beast, but I'll leave it to be understood from that "pretty much" ;).)

[Xorn]

If I hadn't made the Heathen module, I probably never would have decided to make a tutorial showing how to make your own relatively painlessly, which then prompted the video tutorials, so I'd say ultimately it was a good thing. :)

[Bidmaron]

It was a very good thing, Xorn. We are all in debt to you.
--Dale--

[Xorn]

Not really, if anything, consider yourself in debt to this community. ;)

As far as I'm concerned, I still haven't given back as much to this community as I've gained from it. Wow, that was kind of a Pay It Forward moment, wasn't it? :square:

[MeepoSose]

I use a lawyer who specializes in Intellectual Property rights and through that discussion we've been able to rely upon the "fair use" rule for certain items (though completely unrelated to anything gaming.) You would need to seek your own legal advice, but in my opinion this would be fairly easy to represent as "fair use." It's ultimately up to the courts -- assuming WOTC wanted to bring suit against you. The points that I think erode their case of copyright infringement would be

1) All content used in your module has already been released to the public
2) The content is provide free of charge, so by re-releasing the info in the same or another form, you aren't infringing upon WOTC's ability to make profit [i.e. there is NO profit to be made by WOTC]
3) You aren't trying to make a profit from their work
4) You are acknowledging the original work and are merely providing it in a new medium

Here is a snippet from the following website on copyright law at Stanford:
Stanford Copyright & Fair Use (https://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter0/0-b.html#3)



The exception is for materials put to work under the "fair use rule." This rule recognizes that society can often benefit from the unauthorized use of copyrighted materials when the purpose of the use serves the ends of scholarship, education or an informed public. For example, scholars must be free to quote from their research resources in order to comment on the material. To strike a balance between the needs of a public to be well-informed and the rights of copyright owners to profit from their creativity, Congress passed a law authorizing the use of copyrighted materials in certain circumstances deemed to be "fair" -- even if the copyright owner doesn't give permission.

Often, it's difficult to know whether a court will consider a proposed use to be fair. The fair use statute requires the courts to consider the following questions in deciding this issue:

* Is it a competitive use? (In other words, if the use potentially affects the sales of the copied material, it's usually not fair.)
* How much material was taken compared to the entire work of which the material was a part? (The more someone takes, the less likely it is that the use is fair.)
* How was the material used? Is it a transformative use? (If the material was used to help create something new it is more likely to be considered a fair use that if it is merely copied verbatim into another work. Criticism, comment, news reporting, research, scholarship and non-profit educational uses are most likely to be judged fair uses. Uses motivated primarily by a desire for a commercial gain are less likely to be fair use).


This was obviously written with an eye towards unauthorized usage of copyrighted material in an academic environment, but the core statutes remain.

[Griogre]

Of course, now that WotC *is* charging for Dungeon content it might make this a harder case. It will get even worse when WotC starts charging for their "Game Table" in six months to a year.

[docplutonium]

Agreed, now that WOTC ARE charging for their on line content that content is now OBVIOUSLY protected and can no longer be released by us for sharing. Because that WOULD impede WOTC from making a buck.

I'm cool with that, because WOTC is not a charity, they gotta feed their kids too...

But their once free content is STILL FREE in the archives. So you can still download all the adventures for free that they used to offer free...

So would fair use apply to that content that was at one time free AND still could be acquired for free off of Wizard's web site ? I would say yes.

Furthermore... What if WOTC took down all thier once free content. They didn't revamp it, just removed it. Would Fair Use still apply ? THAT I don't know...

Anyways, that's just my thoughts. Copyright is a sticky sticky thing. I can see WOTC going after anyone trying to make a buck or costing them money... as they should... but going after someone because they offered a conversion to free content ? I dunno... I think even if they did sue, any court would be hard pressed to find them awards for damages.

But then again, fair never had anything to do with the law...

Thanks
Doc

[MeepoSose]

My lawyer always cautions me about any public release of information because once something is available to the public domain, it's next to impossible to defend a copyright against it. That's why most companies get signed NDAs (Non-Disclosure Agreements) before showing anything to people outside their organization that they intend to ultimately copyright and protect.

WOTC is going to have tons of private content that you have to subscribe to in order to access it. I don't think it would make sense to target the stuff they already released.